| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| How do you like the new tutorial design? |
| It's great! |
|
70% |
[ 7 ] |
| It's an improvement at least. |
|
20% |
[ 2 ] |
| About the same as the old design. |
|
10% |
[ 1 ] |
| It's no good - change it back! |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 10 |
|
| Author |
Message |
zylstra
Site Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 125
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 10:29 pm New Site Design! |
 |
|
|
Wow!!! After a year of modifying the 1000 pages that comprise the tutorial you now see before you the new design. Don't vote before you take a look at the Tutorial though - I haven't finished redesigning the forum.
Let me know what you think. Thanks to everyone for being such a wonderful part of this community, especially Corey, our outstanding HTML guru.
Please report any errors you see in the Errors board.
See you around the forum! |
|
Pattons3rd
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 1212
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:49 am |
|
|
|
New design looks great! Much smoother and those dropdowns really add a lot.
Good graphics too. |
|
degsy
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 2440
Location: North East, UK
|
|
zylstra
Site Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 125
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:54 pm |
|
|
|
Just for you, degsy baby, check it again! 
Oh, and seriously, as far as errors are concerned I mean any presentational errors such as inconsistencies in formatting, php errors, dead links, etc. in IE, Firefox, and Opera.
Thanks for your help! |
|
seanie morris
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Posts: 49
Location: Offaly, Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 4:34 am |
|
|
|
It is an improvement alright, but I do find it a bit 'skinny'. It can still be widened a bit more I reckon (another 50 pixels each side to start?). This is in a screen res of 1024 X 768.
Nice look though, even the new logo!
Seanie. |
|
zylstra
Site Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 125
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:09 pm |
|
|
|
| I have to account for 800x600, and I like to account for users who use large width scroll bars - like me! |
|
Seamaiden
Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 19
Location: Pine Grove, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:19 am |
|
|
|
Egads! I just ran my "site" (I feel as if I'm committing a crime calling it that!) through that validator and it appears I am very in-valid! I have checked out your site, and it appears that you have some help for Linux users, yes? I am hoping that, even though I haven't made the switch to Ubuntu yet, you folks might be able to provide me a little help with the html editor I'm using, as Quanta assumes I already know the language. If I do, I speak with a broken tongue.  |
|
seanie morris
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Posts: 49
Location: Offaly, Ireland
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 5:45 am |
|
|
|
Well and good zylstra, I can understand that. Bt what about these Google Ad's I see today all of a sudden? I'm not gone on the skyscraper down the left AND the ads in the top header too. Something very cramped looking now. Personally (only my opinion), Google Ads cheapen a site. One I did for a client a couple months ago looked great (if I do say so myself). Now he has the damned ads in every space he can squeeze them into.Looks bad!
 |
|
degsy
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 2440
Location: North East, UK
|
|
zylstra
Site Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 125
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:46 pm |
|
|
|
Seannie, look for more graphical ads in the future. I agree that Google ads cheapen a look.
degsy, there are ~1000 internal pages so it will not be cost effective to validate them. What problem with width do you have? Would you like the forum wider? The reason that the forum is designed the way it is now is for 800x600 users. I wanted a static width site for readability, and 800 was the max I could go and still allow 800x600 users to see it fully. |
|
froggy
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Posts: 7
Location: In front of my computer
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:58 am |
|
|
|
The new site looks slick. I'd liked the simplicity of the old one, but the gee-wiz features of this version don't detract from the site. Thanks.
I also appreciate the site width issue. Although I use a larger screen resolution myself, I also try to design with minimum users in mind. Not everyone wants or knows how to increase their screen resolution from the default 800x600.
A side-note, if I may, what forum software are you using for this forum? Is it a free version, did you pay through the nose for it? I'm considering adding a forum to my new site, but don't really want to invest a lot of money into it (it'd mean getting approvals from my boss and everything first and that's just a PITA). |
|
degsy
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 2440
Location: North East, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 6:45 am |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Would you like the forum wider? The reason that the forum is designed the way it is now is for 800x600 users. I wanted a static width site for readability |
fair enough
I would prefer to have the forum using percentage widths so it can resize to fit.
| Quote: |
A side-note, if I may, what forum software are you using for this forum? Is it a free version
The forum is using phpBB. |
It's free. An alternative is SMF
http://www.simplemachines.org/ |
|
froggy
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Posts: 7
Location: In front of my computer
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:39 am |
|
|
|
| Degs, are you saying that SMF is being used here, or that SMF is just a good free forum software package? If the latter, how does SMF compare to phpBB and what is being used here? |
|
degsy
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 2440
Location: North East, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 8:33 am |
|
|
|
Sorry, the quote got a bit messed up.
This forum uses phpBB which is a good free forum.
SMF is another free forum. As both are free you may want to install both and compare them. |
|
drake14
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 132
Location: around...
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:28 pm |
|
|
|
Looks great! Awesome job!  |
|
|
Forum Home
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
